The Bowl Foundation has denied the allegations
Barebuck’s ,000 41,000 questionable grant: clarification after the election?
Thursday, August 5th, 2021 | 10:48
For a few days, it seems, Analena Bearback got her upper hand back. The leader of the Greens, who has been on the defensive for a long time and who wants Angela Merkel (CDU) to succeed him as chancellor in the autumn, is pushing the people with his best day-to-day proposals and initiatives. He is gripping and aggressive.
Baerbock gains the upper hand, but the shadow remains
Election campaigner Bayer Bouk has promised citizens the largest climate package “this country has ever seen”, poisoning the union’s environmental policy and announcing that he wants to create a new “ministry for immigration policy”. In doing so, he is trying to convey the idea that he is in control again. “Bearback is back” – this is the unspoken motto of the controversial Greens leader.
But things are not so simple. The shadow of her past repeatedly catches up with Analina Bearback. The misinformation in the CV, the stolen paragraph of his book, the Bundestag administration was informed too late about the extra income – these are some of the green leader’s mistakes that remain in the memory.
Bowl Foundation Bareback Scholarship – Wrong?
And there is another peculiarity related to the career of Bearback. It received about 41,000 euros in support, which Green Frontwoman received as a doctoral scholarship holder from the party-affiliated Heinrich Bowl Foundation between April 2009 and December 2012. According to “Tagesspiegel”, Baerbock collected 1050 euros in 39 months, a total of 40,950 euros. The Greens leader did not complete his doctoral thesis.
About four weeks ago, the first doubts arose about the legitimacy of the grant to Bearback. Reason: The Ball Foundation is funded primarily by federal funds, with donations usually coming from the Federal Ministry of Education. Invaluable grant guidelines are bound. This includes that scholarship recipients are not primarily allowed to pursue any other activity that requires their work skills.
Timely work for the green: apparently a violation of the rules
In the case of Annalena Baerbock, these requirements do not appear to have been met. Journalists researched that Bayerbock probably used more than half of his working time for parties. He was the head of state of the Brandenburg Greens from 2009 to 2013, during which time his scholarship also declined. The Greens themselves noted in an earlier financial report that state chairmen spend “more than 50 percent of their working time on state councils.” If anyone assumes that this also applies to Bearback, he probably would not be entitled to financial support from the Ball Foundation.
After the media representatives pushed hard and hard, Baerbock left the offensive. He called on the Ball Foundation to “reconsider” its scholarship process. Bearback announced it on July 10, about four weeks ago.
Of course, the public wants to know what has happened since then. However, the Böll Foundation is silent on the progress of the review – if it has already begun.
Focus asks online, but the Ball Foundation walls
Already on July 18, Focus Online sent out a comprehensive list of those responsible. It should explain, for example, who exactly carries the check, what questions are specifically addressed, and what happens if the illegality of Miss Bearback’s support is determined later: “Do you have to pay in full or in part?”
In addition, the Foundation was asked to explain whether it was aware of Bareback’s time-consuming activities – and if so, why the grant was made. Focus Online also wanted to know if the Bearback Case was discussed within the Foundation and whether there was a voice “against (further) granting scholarships”. Another question was how the Baerbock Foundation provided evidence of the progress of his work. And: “While examining the documentation, did you have any concerns that Mrs. Bearback would not finish her studies due to her high workload?
Foundation spokesperson: The test is over “in a few weeks.”
The Foundation’s response to the request was sobering as could be expected. Press spokesman Michael Alvarez Culvercamp briefly explained that “we are not commenting on this at the moment.” And he added: “Since the matter is now 10 years old, it will take some time to review the holidays.”
Focus Online asked what is meant by the phrase “a little time” and asked: “When do you think the test will end and the results will be made public?” (Please provide specific information such as “in a few days / a few weeks / two months”.) Culvercamp, a spokesman for the foundation, replied that he “unfortunately” and “with the best of intentions in the world” could not accurately predict this. “In that case, I’d rather choose ‘within a few weeks’ as an indication.”
Culvercamp continues: “However, I must say now that we must first send the results of our research to our former scholarship holder who has applied for it.”
Will the test results come after the election?
A statement from the foundation’s spokesman, Focus Online, stated that there was a “certain amount” of explosives in the statement. Because they explicitly state the possibility that the results of the review may be published only after the federal election. It will take place on September 26, so in about seven weeks.
It will not be entirely problematic to inform the citizens only after this date irrespective of the test results. Voters all over Germany want to know in good time whether Analena Barebok has acted properly in the case of a ,000 40,000 subsidy.